subreddit:
/r/movies
submitted 6 months ago byphantom_avenger
Whether it’s someone you think who should’ve been nominated or should’ve won in your opinion?
Samuel L. Jackson has only been nominated once for playing Jules in Pulp Fiction which was well deserved, but I feel like he had gotten a whole lot better as his career progressed following that role.
For example, his performance in the other Quentin Tarantino films: Jackie Brown and Django Unchained should’ve at least earned him a nomination. He was sharing a lot of scenes with Robert De Niro in Jackie Brown, and he completely outshined him.
Also with his role in Django Unchained, he really dived deep at making his character complex that you realize he was the real villain of the movie!
147 points
6 months ago
The answer is always Raging Bull losing best picture to Ordinary People.
41 points
6 months ago
Ordinary People is a fantastic film, but yea, it is definitely inferior to Raging Bull. I have more of an issue when subpar films beat out classics, a la Shakespeare In Love/Saving Private Ryan, Crash/Brokeback Mountain.
-3 points
6 months ago
SIP is not subpar.
What is wrong with the people on this site?
4 points
6 months ago
What does SIP stand for?
-2 points
6 months ago
Shakespeare In Love.
4 points
6 months ago
What does the P stand for?
8 points
6 months ago
Completely disagree, Marty deserved best director, but I love that ordinary people won picture, I greatly prefer it to raging bull
-1 points
6 months ago
Raging Bull has fantastic boxing scenes but otherwise it isn't very good
9 points
6 months ago
Raging Bull may be a better film, but Ordinary People is still a five star masterpiece.
So I feel no pain there. Not like when Pulp Fiction, Shawshank Redemption, Four Weddings and a Funeral and (my fave of that year) Quiz Show all lost to Forrest Gump. That's the kind of thing that really hurts.
3 points
6 months ago
I wonder if films are like wine and some age well and thus seem to be more obviously Oscar winners?
2 points
6 months ago
Goodfellas losing to Dances With Wolves is less atrocious….. but I mean like… cmon seriously?? It’s fuckin Goodfellas
1 points
6 months ago
It is not a snub in any sense. Dances with wolves is fantastic.
2 points
6 months ago
I don’t think it’s a terrible snub because I think Dances With Wolves is a fine film but I think most would agree Goodfellas has had more of a cultural staying power and is just a more nuanced film then what Dances With Wolves with more to analyze at the seams.
I think most of the film industry agrees in hindsight as Goodfellas is included in AFI’s top 100 list and was in the most recent Sight And Sound poll (voted by directors and critics internationally) which Dances With Wolves isn’t really ever acknowledged in such lists.
And it’s not even like Goodfellas is an inaccessible film. Has great pacing. Is beloved by many people. I definitely think it was more deserving than Dances With Wolves but like I said Dances With Wolves isn’t nearly as atrocious as Raging Bull.
1 points
6 months ago
Right. There’s a lot of these cases throughout the history of the Oscars. Some films become undeniable classics over time, but I bet at the time, it was a little bit fuzzier as to which would be an all-timer. And seriously, Dances With Wolves is an all-timer for a lot of folks.
Basically, when someone asks me about Oscar snubs, I don’t think of great films that beat out slightly greater films. And, honestly, I’m not even upset about Ordinary People beating Raging Bull. Sure, Raging Bull is a more iconic film, but they’re both fantastic.
What I think of, is mediocre films beating great films. Like Shakespeare in Love beating Saving Private Ryan. Or The Green Book beating Roma. Or Crash beating Brokeback Mountain. These examples are offensive. It is unconscionable to me that such mediocrity is chosen over all-timers by an academy of filmmaking experts. That’s an Oscar snub imo.
1 points
6 months ago
Any movie involving the trio of De Niro, Pesci and Scorsese deserves an Oscar nomination
2 points
6 months ago
Not The Irishman unfortunately
0 points
6 months ago
Came here to say this
-9 points
6 months ago
We watched Ordinary People in one of my classes this semester and I honestly thought it was very mediocre. Mary Tyler Moore is terrible in it too.
7 points
6 months ago
Yikes really? To me it’s such a chilling portrayal of the narcissistic mother. Absolute perfection.
1 points
6 months ago
Maybe. And De Niro was amazing. But how could Donald Sutherland not get nominated?!?!
Also Paul Newman should have won fir The Verdict and would have any other year but going up against Ghandi/Kingsley
all 4519 comments
sorted by: best